Many Americans will never forget what they saw and heard on July 13th, 2024, when a deranged gunman attempted to assassinate GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump as he was speaking during a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.
As I've noted before, the imagery was some of the most iconic America will ever see. The bullet that hit Trump traveling through the air. A bloodied Trump raising his fist defiantly to the crowd, with no words uttered beyond "fight fight fight" as the meaning of that look on his face was crystal clear:
"I'm still here. I'm alive, and I'm not going any damn where," it said.
It was such an unbelievably powerful moment, and one made even more powerful once news broke some two months later that yet another attempted assassin had been poised to fire shots at the former president until the Secret Service intervened.
While we all marveled at Trump making an appearance during the first day of the Republican National Convention, which was two days after the first assassination attempt, the liberal media sneered, with some wondering aloud whether the bandage Trump was wearing on the ear that had been grazed by the bullet was necessary.
MSNBC host Ari Melber, for instance, referenced a New York Times article on the subject and declared that he agreed with them that ultimately the "prop" bandage was a calculated part of the "spectacle" Trump was allegedly trying to present.
The Times, as it turns out, is still sneering over how Trump kept on keeping on after the two attempts on his life, as evidenced by an incredible piece of pseudo-journalism that asked this question after Trump's well-received appearance at Saturday's Georgia-Alabama game:
The article itself was even more unintentionally comical, with the Times rounding up a handful of maintenance staffers and anti-Trump college football fans at the game to criticize him for being there.
Honestly, I can't think of a much better ad for the Trump campaign than this, complete with them pointing out how members of the corporate media were having struggle sessions over his unwillingness to hide after both attempts to take him out.
In a way, this was the Times telling us they were out of touch with the American electorate without literally stating the fact. I mean we're at a point in our history where, after nearly four years of Joe Biden, people are craving real leadership and someone who is willing to stand their ground, stand up for their country, and stand against woke.
Perhaps I just answered my own question. They wrote this precisely because they know that's what many people see when they look at Trump, and oh no, we can't have that.
Except we have, and we can again depending on the outcome in November.